Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cathay Mulls 787-10 To Replace A330s  
User currently offlineCCA From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2002, 827 posts, RR: 14
Posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4056 times:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ls-787-10-to-replace-a330s-379045/

Quote:
He adds that those decisions are still some way off

Interesting I thought the 787 was dead in the eyes of CX.

What's the earliest an order in say a year from now would have the A/C arriving in CX/KA colors?

CX first A330s must be circa 1997


C152 G115 TB10 CAP10 SR-22 Be76 PA-34 NDN-1T C500 A330-300 A340-300 -600 B747-200F -200SF -400 -400F -400BCF -400ERF -8F
53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3285 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4087 times:

Quoting CCA (Thread starter):
CX first A330s must be circa 1997

The two oldest ones was produced in 1992 (LN12 and LN17), and was used as test aircrafts for Airbus, before delivered to CX in the mid-90s


User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 741 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4092 times:

Scoring a large order from CX would be a major coup for Boeing and the 787-10.
Its going to be a popular aircraft.


Cheers,
StickShaker


User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10594 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4110 times:

The article also mentions older 777 to be replaced. Its about time to do so, once the 787-10 is there, those plane will be pretty old.

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4823 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4111 times:

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 1):
The two oldest ones was produced in 1992 (LN12 and LN17), and was used as test aircrafts for Airbus, before delivered to CX in the mid-90s

What is it with CX and the habit of buying the test aircraft... I believe CX purchased the Boeing B772 test frame too...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages



I guess if the shoe fits...

Regardless congratulations Boeing and CX when the order is announced that is...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3285 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4109 times:

Quoting na (Reply 3):
The article also mentions older 777 to be replaced. Its about time to do so, once the 787-10 is there, those plane will be pretty old.

True, they also have the oldest 777, and several other non-ER models from the mid-90s that should need replacement at the end of this decade, about the time when the -10X should arrive


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1530 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4107 times:

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 5):
True, they also have the oldest 777, and several other non-ER models from the mid-90s that should need replacement at the end of this decade, about the time when the -10X should arrive

CX still has A333s on order, I expect some of those could very well replace the oldest -300s and 772s.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 4):
Regardless congratulations Boeing and CX when the order is announced that is...

There is IMO an excellent chance CX will find the 78J very much suited to its needs. But I don't expect them amongst the early buyers.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12398 posts, RR: 37
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4108 times:

Quoting CCA (Thread starter):
Interesting I thought the 787 was dead in the eyes of CX.

The -8 (too small) and -9 (conflicts with A359) definitely, but the -10 is a different bird, in terms of CASM. In a 2 class layout, (albeit with 9 abreast in Y), the 787-10 could seat up to around 386, although in CX config (they'd be more likely to go 8 abreast in Y), it would be more like 340-350, not far off the current 333 config.

Although I expect most 788/789 customers to go for the 787-10 at some stage, I don't this would be the case with CX. However, I'm sure Boeing would be more than happy with c. 50 from CX.

Interestingly, there is also an article in the "pro" section of Flightglobal - to which unfortunately I don't have access - which says that CX is targeting a mid 2013 decision re the A388 and 747-8, and is also interested in the 777X.

Their 744s are pretty much "has beens" and the fleet is gradually been whittled down, leaving the 77W as its main long haul type; as the CX product is expanded with a new J class and Y+, the capacity of these acft is being reduced, so it really doesn't surprise me that CX is still interested in ULH acft.

[Edited 2012-11-16 04:47:09]

User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4108 times:

All the current 777-200A and 333 operators in Far East Asia that use widebodies for intra-Asia hops should definitely consider the 787-10X - OZ, KE, CA, MU, TG, SQ ....

I still think the 787-9 would be the best selling of the family, but the -10 should definitely eclipse the -8.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30424 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4102 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

An interesting development considering zeke has stated one of the reasons CX went with the A350-900 over the 787-9 was due to the narrower cabin of the 787 not allowing a "common Economy Class hard product experience" across CX's future widebody fleet.

If CX is now willing to budge on tighter seating for a larger 787, perhaps they are willing to budge on tighter seating for a larger 777 (the 777-9X)?

[Edited 2012-11-16 06:50:30]

User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4104 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):

An interesting development considering zeke has stated one of the reasons CX went with the A350-900 over the 787-9 was due to the narrower cabin of the 787 not allowing a "common Economy Class hard product experience" across CX's future widebody fleet.

If CX is now willing to budge on tighter seating for a larger 787, perhaps they are willing to budge on tighter seating for a larger 777 (the 777-9X)?

Or ... CX is splitting their economy class into regional and long-haul ?

Put the 787-10X on flights 6 hours or shorter (out to India, DPS, and CTS), and use tighter 3-3-3 regional Y seating

Put 359 and 777-8x/9x on flights 7 hours or longer (including all M.E. and O.Z. flights) using a comfortable 3-3-3 long haul Y.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2591 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4100 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 5):
True, they also have the oldest 777, and several other non-ER models from the mid-90s that should need replacement at the end of this decade, about the time when the -10X should arrive

If by "several other non-ER models from the mid-90s" you mean 777-200s, yes, I would agree. But I'm not so sure about the 777-300.

CX has 398 seats in the 777-300 - more seats than any other type in its fleet. The 787-10 isn't going to be as big as the 777-300, and given that the 787-10 is likely to be configured in an 8-abreast layout - as I would expect them to be - there is going to be quite a significant seat count deficit between the 787-10 and the 777-300. It may well be that the 787-10, despite the seat count deficit, ends up having better costs per seat. But I think the 777-300 is in a unique position as a very high capacity, medium haul aircraft, with no imminent replacement that fills its shoes precisely.

Besides, CX's newest 777-300 (non-ER) was delivered in 2006. 5 of their 12 777-300s aren't even 10 years old, so I'd expect those to carry on in the fleet until post-2020.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 7):
although in CX config (they'd be more likely to go 8 abreast in Y), it would be more like 340-350, not far off the current 333 config.

I would expect that they'll put 8-abreast in the 787-10 as well. That way, they can offer product consistency across the range. The 787-10 should have wider seats at 8-abreast than the A350XWB at 9-abreast.

The 787-10 would make a perfect A330-300 replacement. While they still have A333s on order (so I don't expect the 787-10 to completely displace the A333s in CX's fleet), some of their older ones are likely to make way by the end of this decade when the 787-10 arrives.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 8):
All the current 777-200A and 333 operators in Far East Asia that use widebodies for intra-Asia hops should definitely consider the 787-10X

  

Agreed.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30424 posts, RR: 84
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4100 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 10):
Or ... CX is splitting their economy class into regional and long-haul?
zeke specifically noted that CX did not want customers switching between long-haul and regional aircraft from noticing the hard product was different.

That being said, the A350 order was placed when Tony Tyler was CEO. It is possible that new CEO John Slosar has a different view on hard product consistency in the Economy cabin.



Quoting CXB77L (Reply 11):
But I think the 777-300 is in a unique position as a very high capacity, medium haul aircraft, with no imminent replacement that fills its shoes precisely.

The A350-1000 would be an excellent airframe to replace the 777-300.



Quoting CXB77L (Reply 11):
The 787-10 should have wider seats at 8-abreast than the A350XWB at 9-abreast.

In such a configuration, the 787-10 would offer about an extra inch of seat-cushion width.

[Edited 2012-11-16 07:21:03]

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8844 posts, RR: 75
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4103 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):

Boeing has been talking to CX for a long time on all the different 787 models, which is why I was surprised with the Boeing news release that came out last week saying they are now able to talk to airlines about it, they have been. I did not see the point of it.

The oldest A330s have been replaced with new A330s for some time now, with more of them departing the fleet next year, I think I the next 12 months there are around another 6 new A330s coming in, with only an overall fleet increase of one frame.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3285 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4099 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 11):
If by "several other non-ER models from the mid-90s" you mean 777-200s, yes, I would agree

Yes, I only meant the -200s


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30424 posts, RR: 84
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4101 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting zeke (Reply 13):
Boeing has been talking to CX for a long time on all the different 787 models, which is why I was surprised with the Boeing news release that came out last week saying they are now able to talk to airlines about it, they have been. I did not see the point of it.

The impression I received from both CX's press release at the time of the 2010 order and your subsequent posts on the matter was that CX had decided on the A350 family over the 787 family and that no further RFPs would be issued for this class of aircraft.

So I admit to being intrigued and surprised that Boeing and CX have still been speaking about the 787 since the original A350 order was placed and subsequently expanded.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8844 posts, RR: 75
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4108 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):

Boeing talk to CX all the time about every product, 737 to 747-8, talk does not mean we are buying. Airbus is exactly the same.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4104 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
zeke specifically noted that CX did not want customers switching between long-haul and regional aircraft from noticing the hard product was different.

That being said, the A350 order was placed when Tony Tyler was CEO. It is possible that new CEO John Slosar has a different view on hard product consistency in the Economy cabin.

Switching from their flat bed J on 77Ws to those hideous reclining "regional Js" on 773As is a much larger inconsistency compared to switching 3-3-3 on 777 to 3-3-3 on 787.

Nothing as extreme as Lufthansa though - going from A380 F to "intra European J" (aka economy class with middle seat blocked out).


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2591 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4106 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
zeke has stated one of the reasons CX went with the A350-900 over the 787-9 was due to the narrower cabin of the 787 not allowing a "common Economy Class hard product experience" across CX's future widebody fleet.

They can still keep a "common Economy Class hard product experience" by using 8-across seating in the 787-10. I think the fact that they didn't for smaller 787 variants is that the cost per seat equation doesn't add up. That's where the extra size of the 787-10 comes in.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
The A350-1000 would be an excellent airframe to replace the 777-300.

I agree, and have said so in other threads, but I meant specifically a large widebody optimised around high capacity, medium haul missions. I guess the A350-1000, being very much a long haul aircraft, could be paper derated to a lower MTOW to fulfill medium haul missions to replace the 777-300, though. I would imagine that such an arrangement would allow the operator the flexibility of re-rating it to a higher MTOW should the need arise, thus the need for a dedicated very large mid hauler is no longer present.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineneutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4101 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
zeke specifically noted that CX did not want customers switching between long-haul and regional aircraft from noticing the hard product was different.


I would take anything he said concerning Boeing with (cfrp) barrels of salt.



Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30424 posts, RR: 84
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4098 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 19):
They can still keep a "common Economy Class hard product experience" by using 8-across seating in the 787-10. I think the fact that they didn't for smaller 787 variants is that the cost per seat equation doesn't add up. That's where the extra size of the 787-10 comes in.

I would expect the 787-10 at 8-abreast would seat less than the A350-900 at 9-abreast so I'd be interested to see how the CASM argument works out.

That being said, if CX did fly the 787-10 at 8-abreast, it would be the most comfortable regional airframe in operation with any airline - more comfortable than SQ's A350s and TZ's 787s. More comfortable than JQ's 787s and QF's A330s. More comfortable than NH's and JL's 787s. And significantly more comfortable than Air Asia's A330s and A350s.

So perhaps CX is hoping a class-leading product will result in class-leading fares and therefore the RASM will outweigh the CASM.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8844 posts, RR: 75
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4098 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 18):

The old regional business is in the process of being pulled out across the fleet. Not many aircraft remain, the regional economy is not the long haul economy either. The priority was with the long haul product, all of the long haul 77Ws have now been converted with the new long haul product.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4095 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 21):
The old regional business is in the process of being pulled out across the fleet. Not many aircraft remain, the regional economy is not the long haul economy either. The priority was with the long haul product, all of the long haul 77Ws have now been converted with the new long haul product.

The "new" regional business is still ... well, regional. It's a nice premium economy seat with extra legroom. They should've went with a product comparable to SQ's new regional.


User currently offlineflylku From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4086 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 20):
That being said, if CX did fly the 787-10 at 8-abreast, it would be the most comfortable regional airframe in operation with any airline - more comfortable than SQ's A350s and TZ's 787s. More comfortable than JQ's 787s and QF's A330s. More comfortable than NH's and JL's 787s. And significantly more comfortable than Air Asia's A330s and A350s.

What would make it more comfortable than NH's 8 abreast 787 configuration? Is NH the only airline that has or plans for 8 abreast 787 configuration?



...are we there yet?
User currently onlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4322 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4086 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 4):

What is it with CX and the habit of buying the test aircraft... I believe CX purchased the Boeing B772 test frame too...

I'm sure they got a great deal.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
25 Stitch : The 8-abreast configuration is meant for long-haul services to the US and EU, I believe. Yes, they are using it on flights to HKG (or at least were d
26 kaitak : SIA was going to do it (pretty sure Scoot won't!); I think BA will be eight abreast.
27 zeke : SQ does not really have a new regional product or for that matter aircraft that are used only for regional routes. That is their medium haul product,
28 rcair1 : Frankly - I think this is a non-issue for most of the flying public. They think "I'm on a different airplane - it is different" if they think about i
29 zeke : That is your view, our frequent travelers which there are a lot of, do notice the difference.
30 CX Flyboy : Remember the really frequent travellers treat planes as their second homes and many will spend more time in a CX plane than in their own beds. They g
31 AF185 : To date, the difference between long haul and some regional planes is quite noticeable for most frequent CX travellers. But in the end, the old regio
32 Stitch : As a heavy United Business Class traveller in the mid-2000s, I didn't notice the difference between the 21" wide seats on the 777-200 and 20.5" wide s
33 Lutfi : When CX said that the A350/787 debate had been settled for the A350, I think they were talking very specifically about that RFP - which was for A340 r
34 AeroWesty : The BA 787 seat plan has been posted on another forum, and it shows 3-3-3 in World Traveller (Coach/Economy).
35 N62NA : Is this how the 787-10 will be represented in 3 characters? I always wondered how they were going to do that!
36 mogandoCI : Link please ?
37 Post contains links Stitch : It's on FlyerTalk.com - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/briti...b/1408362-boeing-787-seatplan.html CW:35 (2-3-2), WT+:25 (2-3-2), WT:154 (3-3-3). Maki
38 kaitak : Hmm ... disappointing. I'm sure I had read somewhere that BA was originally going to go 8 abreast. I guess the sums just didn't add up. I wonder if t
39 Stitch : Yes, the original configuration was believed to be 2-3-2 in WT+ and 2-4-2 in WT. 3-3-3 on the 787-9 will be no less comfortable than 3-4-3 on the 777
40 kaitak : Hmm .... hard to tell, the future is! I tend to think they'll go for 3-3-3. The cabin widths of the various models are as follows, in ascending order
41 Stitch : At 2+4+2 on the 787, the seat cushion width is 18.5" with a 21.5" aisle At 3+3+3 on the 787, the seat cushion width is 17.2" with a 18.0" aisle To fi
42 Viscount724 : All their seat maps on their website show 8-abreast. Why would a carrier taking delivery of a new aircraft type plan to change the seating so soon af
43 Post contains links and images Stitch : NH will operate the 787-8 domestically in two configurations: 264 - 12F | 252Y (2+4+2) 335 - 12F | 323Y (3+3+3) [Edited 2012-11-20 14:05:58]
44 sunrisevalley : From another thread.. I can see the 787-10 being attractive to a carrier like CX in an 8-across configuration . Quote......... Quoting CXB77L (Reply 1
45 Viscount724 : Thanks. The 9-abreast one must be fairly new. They also have 2 other 8-abreast configurations for international flights which would seem to indicate
46 zeke : They didn't say that, they said the A350 would " "form the backbone of Cathay Pacific's future mid-sized wide-body fleet". The A350s will replace a l
47 jfk777 : The A350-900 always looked as the A330 replacement. With 50 77W and about 50 A350-900/1000 where is Cathay going to fly all these planes. Cathay has
48 zeke : That is your observation not mine. I do not recall any announcement to suggest that is the case. CX is still taking delivery of new A330s. They are y
49 Post contains links mffoda : Zeke, you seem to be very well connected to the CX decision making process? What do you think of aspire aviation article (below) on CX, SQ and QF...
50 9252fly : Any chance these could be potentially destined for KA ? Seems like it could be a good fit, then again, what do I know.
51 Flighty : Boeing PR, like the Chinese government, issues press releases as an involuntary reaction to their own fears and anxieties. The truth can be found els
52 Stitch : That image and the configuration are from an NH press release on their website that was linked on a.net sometime earlier this year, if I recall corre
53 zeke : I have a low opinion of the Aspire Aviation blog. It is just a blog, i.e. someones opinion that is shared on the internet, often it is wrong.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
FI: 787-10 To Face A350-900 Challenge posted Mon Jan 29 2007 11:26:06 by RichardPrice
772NG Or 787-10 To Compete With A350-900? posted Fri May 20 2005 00:53:18 by NorCal
787-10 Authority To Offer Coming Soon posted Fri Sep 28 2012 11:02:05 by WarpSpeed
787-10 EIS Moving To The Right, 777-X Up Next? posted Tue Aug 14 2012 20:59:37 by WarpSpeed
787-10 Back On The Table As Answer To A330-300 posted Mon Dec 20 2010 11:45:03 by dtw9
Cathay To Replace Long Haul Seating posted Mon Oct 11 2010 21:14:40 by kaitak
Air India To Lease 4 A330s Due To 787 Delay. posted Fri Sep 24 2010 05:55:44 by FCKC
No 787-10 Due To Potential 777 Improvements posted Wed Apr 21 2010 11:19:05 by CFBFrame
Boeing Close To Defining 787-10 posted Tue Nov 13 2007 10:52:59 by T773ER
A350s To Replace A340s, How About A330s? posted Tue Nov 13 2007 00:46:52 by BrightCedars